Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Law
Indecency Four Years After Fox Television Stations: From Big Papi To A Porn Star, An Egregious Mess At The Fcc Continues, Clay Calvert, Minch Minchin, Keran Billaud, Kevin Bruckenstein, Tershone Phillips
Indecency Four Years After Fox Television Stations: From Big Papi To A Porn Star, An Egregious Mess At The Fcc Continues, Clay Calvert, Minch Minchin, Keran Billaud, Kevin Bruckenstein, Tershone Phillips
University of Richmond Law Review
Using the WDBJ case as an analytical springboard, this article examines the tumultuous state of the FCC's indecency enforcement regime more than three years after the Supreme Court's June 2012 opinion in Fox Television Stations. Part I of this article briefly explores the missed First Amendment opportunities in Fox Television Stations, as well as some possible reasons why the Supreme Court chose to avoid the free-speech questions in that case." Part II addresses the FCC's decision in September 2012 to target only egregious instances of broadcast indecency and, in the process, to jettison hundreds of thousands of complaints that had …
In Memoriam: Justice Antonin Scalia And The Constitution's Golden Thread, L. Margaret Harker
In Memoriam: Justice Antonin Scalia And The Constitution's Golden Thread, L. Margaret Harker
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Three Supreme Court “Failures” And A Story Of Supreme Court Success, Corinna Barrett Lain
Three Supreme Court “Failures” And A Story Of Supreme Court Success, Corinna Barrett Lain
Law Faculty Publications
Plessy v. Ferguson. Buck v. Bell. Korematsu v. United States. Together, these three decisions legitimated ‘separate but equal,’ sanctioned the forced sterilization of thousands, and ratified the removal of Japanese Americans from their homes during World War II. By Erwin Chemerinsky’s measure in The Case Against the Supreme Court, all three are Supreme Court failures—cases in which the Court should have protected vulnerable minorities, but failed to do so. Considered in historical context, however, a dramatically different impression of these cases, and the Supreme Court that decided them, emerges. In two of the cases—Plessy and Buck—the Court’s ruling reflected the …
Guarding The Guardians: Judges' Rights And Virginia's Judicial Inquiry And Review Commission, Jeffrey D. Mcmahan Jr.
Guarding The Guardians: Judges' Rights And Virginia's Judicial Inquiry And Review Commission, Jeffrey D. Mcmahan Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Overcoming Lochner In The Twenty-First Century: Taking Both Rights And Popular Sovereignty Seriously As We Seek To Secure Equal Citizenship And Promote The Public Good, Thomas B. Mcaffee
Overcoming Lochner In The Twenty-First Century: Taking Both Rights And Popular Sovereignty Seriously As We Seek To Secure Equal Citizenship And Promote The Public Good, Thomas B. Mcaffee
University of Richmond Law Review
Professor McAffee reviews substantive due process as the textual basis for modern fundamental rights constitutional decision-making. He contends that we should avoid both the undue literalism that rejects the idea of implied rights, as well as the attempt to substitute someone's preferred moral vision for the limits, and compromises, that are implicit in and intended by the Constitution's text. He argues, moreover, that we can largely harmonizethe variousgoals of our constitutionalsystem by taking rights se- riously and by understanding that securing rights does not ex-haustthe Constitution'spurposes.
The Double Standard In Judicial Selection, Edwin Meese Iii
The Double Standard In Judicial Selection, Edwin Meese Iii
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
First Principles For Virginia's Fifth Century, Hon. Robert F. Mcdonnell
First Principles For Virginia's Fifth Century, Hon. Robert F. Mcdonnell
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Federal Judicial Selection: The First Decade, Maeva Marcus
Federal Judicial Selection: The First Decade, Maeva Marcus
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Advice And Consent: Ensuring Judicial Freedom, Patrick J. Leahy
Advice And Consent: Ensuring Judicial Freedom, Patrick J. Leahy
University of Richmond Law Review
Throughout this nation's history, Americans have turned to the Supreme Court to protect their rights against excesses of the legislative and executive branches. To protect this crucial role of the Court, the Framers realized that neither the executive nor the legislature should have the power to cast the Court in its own image. To prevent this usurpation of one branch by another, the Framers wisely required the President to obtain the advice and consent of the Senate in making appointments to the Supreme Court.